Re: [Roll] Ralph's DISCUSS on MRHOF spec

Ralph Droms <rdroms.ietf@gmail.com> Fri, 29 June 2012 20:13 UTC

Return-Path: <rdroms.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F045321F8885 for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Jun 2012 13:13:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.299
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_62=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id L6Xi9ip29JEJ for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Jun 2012 13:13:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qa0-f51.google.com (mail-qa0-f51.google.com [209.85.216.51]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4662C21F85A4 for <roll@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Jun 2012 13:13:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by qaea16 with SMTP id a16so890746qae.10 for <roll@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Jun 2012 13:13:17 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; bh=JAHNUuYalJ/flDFuhOlpxR9hK9UjN65wNFk+oQHWsDE=; b=wzyrIGO8VG/1Zsd7jr2KwP8Q2FotnwBWy8n6dd+o/8F0f/W51NsXOm7anz3uiKtzG+ MQrkwK1d3P8qXc8HxKr5unDvSNgw3Po2RVsFxv1sZPxFOf1/Hl1Y42ZaDIIlnAkuyo5l MGZkhsZam97YciVGUS6n/tCU/ONX+A9j2dY2G/3ZzwEUu1Je5fT/bmzG18ZnT2IFOf0M AQvUkJEHXrk+RMNTcWlPep9cHHkiWl4gubUVPdIbkCgBfW7ZDKn6z75iqqvYOHA2wfSN xLRURIt7NX+HzthI+SesUBUFOJq+L6uu2NCLlgm/Q4RQlyYSuApyfXokHGgIqP0T0D0Y QI9g==
Received: by 10.229.135.149 with SMTP id n21mr1532619qct.82.1341000797627; Fri, 29 Jun 2012 13:13:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [161.44.65.173] ([161.44.65.173]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id cv19sm12336028qab.20.2012.06.29.13.13.15 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 29 Jun 2012 13:13:16 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1278)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Ralph Droms <rdroms.ietf@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAErDfUQ+EULihUq_-i2S8JAirR2i5w7Ac5KhKqWGhhCr9LRnAw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2012 16:13:14 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <329D1266-9381-404B-B48C-E89B67881B58@gmail.com>
References: <CAErDfUTf-0VFhrAe+Dkbrq68K4XHmwQRw0_KKq5DsCd-PKEWOA@mail.gmail.com> <283139735.80026.1340996412381.JavaMail.root@mail17.pantherlink.uwm.edu> <CAErDfUQ+EULihUq_-i2S8JAirR2i5w7Ac5KhKqWGhhCr9LRnAw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Omprakash Gnawali <gnawali@cs.uh.edu>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1278)
Cc: Brian Haberman <brian@innovationslab.net>, Stiemerling Martin <mstiemerling@googlemail.com>, Michael Richardson <mcr@sandelman.ca>, roll <roll@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Roll] Ralph's DISCUSS on MRHOF spec
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/roll>, <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/roll>
List-Post: <mailto:roll@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll>, <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2012 20:13:19 -0000

On Jun 29, 2012, at 3:05 PM 6/29/12, Omprakash Gnawali wrote:

> On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 12:00 PM, Mukul Goyal <mukul@uwm.edu> wrote:
>>> It is clear that we will benefit by explicitly stating how to tell
>> what metric+OF is used in the network. Unless there is any objection,
>> I will will proceed with the explanation that metric selection is
>> indicated by the presence of the metric in the container and OF
>> selection by OCP. For example, MRHOF(ETX) will use OF for MRHOF and
>> ETX will be in the metric container.
>> 
>> I agree except that, for MRHOF, absence of a metric container means that ETX is the metric in use.
> 
> Agree. Thanks for the reminder.

OK ... that's not the design decision I would have made, but a design decision is not an issue to hold a Discuss on.

A corollary of this design decision is that there can be at most one (in the case of ETX as the metric, zero) metric in the container.  The draft will need some editing to be consistent about that constraint.

- Ralph

> 
> - om_p
> _______________________________________________
> Roll mailing list
> Roll@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll